RussellEbertHandball
Flick pass expert
What do you mean by Overnight? Normal viewer numbers on terrestrial TV?
MIA
62 v BRO
52 Q2
SYD
0 v HAW
0 PM
WCE
0 v GWS
0 PM
ESS
0 v GCS
0 PM
STG
0 v CRO
0 PM
NEW
0 v CAN
0 PM
NZ
0 v CBD
0 PM
LAC
0 v NO
0 PM
SAC
0 v UTH
0 PM
DEN
0 v MIL
0 PM
PHX
0 v PHI
0 PM
COL
21.9
135 v POR
9.10
64 FT
FRE
10.12
72 v NM
11.7
73 FT
WB
5.11
41 v STK
14.8
92 FT
ADE
10.16
76 v RIC
17.6
108 FT
NQ
24 v GC
12 FT
CAS
13.16
94 v FFC
8.9
57 FT
SOU
13 v MAN
12 FT
STH
17.16
118 v SAN
4.8
32 FT
UTH
116 v MIL
144 FT
DAL
109 v CHA
117 FT
ATL
143 v IND
130 FT
SAC
135 v PHX
127 FT
LAL
116 v OKC
111 FT
WSH
136 v SA
124 FT
TOR
118 v DET
97 FT
GS
120 v PHI
112 FT
MEM
151 v HOU
114 FT
POR
96 v CHI
124 FT
BOS
120 v IND
95 FT
-
Tip round 2 in Tipping - Weekly Platinum Membership prize.
Presented by The Golden Ticket - For Medallion Club tickets and Corporate Box tickets at the MCG and Marvel.
Round 1 Winner: Verdun66
Play Nice 2021 Crowds and Ratings Thread
- Thread starter The_Wookie
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Status
What do you mean by Overnight? Normal viewer numbers on terrestrial TV?
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,027
any numbers released the morning after the broadcast are "preliminary overnight" and is what is commonly used for ratings news, because its current and no one wants to wait a week to highlight viewership
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,029
| Metro Linear TV | Regional Linear TV | National | Metro | Regional | ||||||||||
| Rank | Program | Network / Affiliate | Total TV Audience | Lift on Overnight | Overnight | 7 Day TV Time Shift | Overnight | 7 Day TV Time Shift | BVOD | BVOD | BVOD | Fox O/N | Kayo/Go/Now | Total |
| 1 | SEVEN'S AFL: GRAND FINAL: MELBOURNE V WESTERN BULLDOGS | SEVEN | 4,156,000 | 1% | 3,006,000 | 36,000 | 907,000 | 10,000 | 197000 | 0 | 0 | 4,156,000 | ||
| 4 | SEVEN'S AFL: FRIDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL FINALS | SEVEN | 1,321,000 | 2% | 1,012,000 | 17,000 | 288,000 | 4,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 428,000 | 252,520 | 2,001,520 |
| 2 | SEVEN'S AFL: SATURDAY NIGHT FOOTBALL FINALS | SEVEN | 1,203,000 | 1% | 931,000 | 7,000 | 262,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 384,000 | 226,560 | 1,813,560 |
| 3 | Sevens AFL Saturday Night Football Finals | Seven | 1,117,000 | 835,000 | 5,000 | 274,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 425,000 | 196,000 | 1,738,000 | |
| 5 | Sevens AFL Friday Night Football Finals | Seven | 942,000 | 698,000 | 2,000 | 239,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 324,000 | 159,000 | 1,425,000 | |
| 4 | Sevens Saturday Afternoon Football Finals | Seven | 901,000 | 693,000 | 3,000 | 202,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 267,000 | 168,000 | 1,336,000 | |
| 3 | Sevens Saturday Night Football Finalls | SEVEN | 1,061,000 | 822,000 | 5,000 | 231,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 267,000 | 200,000 | 1,528,000 | |
| 5 | Sevens Friday Night Football Finals | Seven | 1,058,000 | 840,000 | 7,000 | 208,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 263,000 | 178,000 | 1,499,000 | |
| 5 | Sevens Sunday Afternoon Football Finals | Seven | 1,034,000 | 789,000 | 1,000 | 241,000 | 3,000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 291,000 | 189,000 | 1,514,000 | |
| Total | 17,011,080 | |||||||||||||
| Metro Linear TV | Regional Linear TV | National | Metro | Regional | ||||||||||
| Rank | Program | Network / Affiliate | Total TV Audience | Lift on Overnight | Overnight | 7 Day TV Time Shift | Overnight | 7 Day TV Time Shift | BVOD | BVOD | BVOD | Fox O/N | Kayo/Go/Now | Total |
| 1 | Rugby League Finals Series GF | Nine | 2,202,000 | 1,031,000 | 363,000 | 0 | 0 | 3,596,000 | ||||||
| 8 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES PF2 | NINE | 1,318,000 | 8% | 812,000 | 1,000 | 408,000 | 6,000 | 91,000 | 68,000 | 23,000 | 462000 | 272580 | 2,052,580 |
| 5 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES PF1 | NINE | 1,226,000 | 10% | 729,000 | 4,000 | 390,000 | 4,000 | 99,000 | 74,000 | 25,000 | 429000 | 253110 | 1,908,110 |
| 3 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES SF2 | NINE | 1,172,000 | 9% | 688,000 | 6,000 | 390,000 | 4,000 | 84,000 | 63,000 | 21,000 | 442000 | 260780 | 1,874,780 |
| 6 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES SF1 | NINE | 1,026,000 | 8% | 617,000 | 4,000 | 334,000 | 1,000 | 70,000 | 52,000 | 18,000 | 358000 | 211220 | 1,595,220 |
| 3 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES QF2 | NINE | 928,000 | 8% | 537,000 | 4,000 | 319,000 | 4,000 | 64,000 | 47,000 | 17,000 | 382000 | 225380 | 1,535,380 |
| 9 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINALS SERIES EF2 | NINE | 893,000 | 6% | 523,000 | 0 | 322,000 | 1,000 | 47,000 | 34,000 | 13,000 | 330000 | 194700 | 1,417,700 |
| 6 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES QF1 | NINE | 886,000 | 8% | 525,000 | 3,000 | 292,000 | 2,000 | 64,000 | 47,000 | 17,000 | 336000 | 198240 | 1,420,240 |
| 5 | RUGBY LEAGUE FINAL SERIES EF1 | NINE | 766,000 | 6% | 462,000 | 2,000 | 258,000 | 1,000 | 43,000 | 32,000 | 11,000 | 344000 | 202960 | 1,312,960 |
| Total | 16,712,970 | |||||||||||||
| AFL Total | 17,011,080 | |||||||||||||
| AFL Lead | 298,110 |
The BVOD/VPM data actually demonstrates just how flawed it is to compare aggregated averages of sports that go for different lengths of time
Here are the results from the week that included the AFL prelims and the first week of the NRL finals
https://reports.oztam.com.au/#/rolling/7
These are based on the foxtel now / go ratings...
Essentially what it shows is, across those 5 games you had more people (300 on average) watching more minutes (7 minutes) of the AFL games and yet the headline result is 10,300 lower average.
This is the same across all FTA, foxtel, Kayo numbers. The averages are not comparable data points, the volume and reach are.
Here are the results from the week that included the AFL prelims and the first week of the NRL finals
https://reports.oztam.com.au/#/rolling/7
These are based on the foxtel now / go ratings...
Essentially what it shows is, across those 5 games you had more people (300 on average) watching more minutes (7 minutes) of the AFL games and yet the headline result is 10,300 lower average.
This is the same across all FTA, foxtel, Kayo numbers. The averages are not comparable data points, the volume and reach are.
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,031
FTA BVOD data is more accurate in my post above this. And doesnt include Fox Go/NOW who evidently arent being included in VOZ.
Now you just need to convince an entire industry of ratings experts and tv execs and advertisers that you are are right and they are wrong.
Gigantor
Brownlow Medallist
- May 13, 2012
- 15,747
- 5,876
- AFL Club
- GWS
- Other Teams
- Brumbies, Socceroos
It's not really a case of right or wrong.
It's a case of how the totality of the data is used; how the advertisers and sponsors respond with all of the data.
And we've known the result of that for nigh on 30 years now.
A bit of banter between fans of different football codes ain't ever going to change that.
Don't know what VOZ is but the foxtel go / now data VPM data on the OZTAM cite is presumably a (minority) portion of the Kayo / Go / Now column in your table
Well, no, I really don't.
For a start, average ratings I am sure are the most useful and valid data for most purposes such ratings data is gathered for.
I am just posting here to say that aggregating average ratings for different length events and comparing them is fundamentally flawed. This isn't opinion, it is demonstrable fact (which I demonstrated through the example above)
And there isn't some whole industry doing this. If I google "AFL aggregate TV ratings" and the first two links that come up are "footy industry" and "TV blackbox"
Exactly right. The actual effect of the data being misrepresented in cumulative averages is Roy Masters and some other mungos getting their hopes up they are going to get more cash in the next TV rights deal....and getting disappointed every time
OK, so here is another example based on this (couldn't find this on Oz Tam's cite so just using this old Wookie post from this thread
This is obviously from 2020 with shorter matches....it was a blow out between Melbourne and Hawthorn which is also likely to supress the numbers at the end.
The average for the match works out to be 280K (actually recorded as 285K which presumably means the coding loses some of the drag of that first number). The average from 4 to 6 (eg when the NRL ratings would be captured) was 298K.
Again, over a normal three hour game the 3pm to 4pm component would drag down the average considerably further. In combination with the bump into the news, I suspect this is why the NRL looks more competitive on Sunday afternoons than on Friday nights.
This is obviously from 2020 with shorter matches....it was a blow out between Melbourne and Hawthorn which is also likely to supress the numbers at the end.
The average for the match works out to be 280K (actually recorded as 285K which presumably means the coding loses some of the drag of that first number). The average from 4 to 6 (eg when the NRL ratings would be captured) was 298K.
Again, over a normal three hour game the 3pm to 4pm component would drag down the average considerably further. In combination with the bump into the news, I suspect this is why the NRL looks more competitive on Sunday afternoons than on Friday nights.
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,036
VOZ is the new standard industry measuring system that includes consolidated 7 day ratings across metro, regional and BVOD.
fair enough. Its just that no one else does this in the industry across FTA, BVOD or PayTv.
Which are literally the same person - me. The AFL also report aggregated data in some annual reports - particularly weekly aggregates for all but 1 of the last 20 years, and the NRL has from time to time but not since 2016 i think. Roy Masters has as well - when he's not also citing me.
That was my point. There is no whole industry aggregating AFL and NRL averages and comparing them. The "industry" is largely you.
The fact that the AFL has made the same mistake in its annual reports to its own detriment (though it is not presented as a comparison with the NRL presumably) doesn't make it right.
Just as an example, other sports use "cumulative reach" (or total reach) when aggregating multiple games
Rugby World Cup breaks records with 857 million viewers - Digital TV Europe
The 2019 Rugby World Cup has broken the record for the most-viewed rugby union tournament. According to governing body World Rugby, more than 857 million people watched the tournament from Japan. This represented a 26% increase from the tournament hosted in England in 2015. In terms of live...
Record audience watched 'best World Cup ever' - FIFA
A record audience of more than 3.5 billion people watched this year's World Cup in Russia, with the final between France and Croatia attracting 1.12 billion viewers, world soccer's governing body said on Friday.
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,038
The Industry is not "largely me" just because its all thats convenient for you to find. the AFL has been doing it since at least 1994. Over the years, The NRL has done so, Netball has done so. Cricket has done so. And so has the assorted media that follows them. The comparisons were pretty much only being done by Masters before I started.
Reach is tyipically advertised by sports for major one off events
Just as an example, other sports use "cumulative reach" (or total reach) when aggregating multiple games
Rugby World Cup breaks records with 857 million viewers - Digital TV Europe
The 2019 Rugby World Cup has broken the record for the most-viewed rugby union tournament. According to governing body World Rugby, more than 857 million people watched the tournament from Japan. This represented a 26% increase from the tournament hosted in England in 2015. In terms of live...www.digitaltveurope.com
Record audience watched 'best World Cup ever' - FIFA
A record audience of more than 3.5 billion people watched this year's World Cup in Russia, with the final between France and Croatia attracting 1.12 billion viewers, world soccer's governing body said on Friday.www.reuters.com
First article doesnt mention reach, but does note total cumulative audiences - which is almost always used to describe averages, not reach.
To the extent those sports are aggregating averages, they are not making direct comparisons.
As an aside, I am keen to see how cricket does it for test matches. Does it use an average across the whole 5 days of the test or does it do it by day or by session?
I've genuinely had a decent look and so far found you, Old Roy and some dude called Shaun Carney making comparisons between aggregated AFL and NRL data. There is certainly nobody doing it consistently
Really?
This is clearly cumulative reach (or equivalent)
Given the live audience for the whole tournament was given at 501 million earlier in the article and explicitly for the final "an average audience of 44.9 million fans watching live " it is not plausible that this could be anything but a cumulative reach figure.
In terms of your claim that "total cumulative audiences" are "almost always used to describe averages, not reach", what could you possibly be basing that on? I've just googled "total cumulative audiences" and "cumulative audiences" etc and, after sampling about 20, this is the only one that at least appears to be a cumulative of the average
EURO 2020 was watched by a total audience of FIVE BILLION viewers
The tournament, held across eleven cities, including London, in June and July attracted a cumulative audience of 5.23 billion viewers, slightly up on the last tournament in 2016.
Cumulative audience "cume" seems most often used to measure total unique viewers / listeners
Rob
Premium Platinum
NoobPie is right though. In his example, more people watched the AFL on average for longer, yet going by average audience you'd think significantly more people watched the NRL.
It's not about right or wrong, it's simply the flawed use of average audience when judging what is most watched.
The_Wookie
Queenslander
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #2,041
True. Thats been the media, and later myself, and later the media quoting myself.
ratings averages are reported session by session.
Roy was doing it long before me, probably Hunter Fujak as well. Few others, some in media some in books.
On further reflection, your most likely right.
Happy to concede I was wrong on this. Cume is more generally used to describe reach in any given period. Cumulative total audience is far more likely to be for a reach, unless it specifices cumulative average.
Its not that hes right or wrong, its industry standards I dont get to make up as there are many people outside this forum who also pay attention to this sort of thing. Its also not in VOZ, which the industry is moving to.
On simple averages, they did.
We get some Reach data from Seven, and used to from Nine, but the Nine data has dropped right off the planet.
I have included average minutes watched before across all mediums, and the end of year tables allow for that.
Appreciate the acknowledgements
I guess where we would ultimately continue to disagree on is the extent that there is something that you could call an "industry standard" in terms of comparing aggregated sports ratings......and obviously the usefulness of such comparisons based on averages where one of the sports goes for 50% longer.
Paper by Hunter Fujak from last decade worth the read to those interested (which is most who hang out on this sub forum), not just for my own point score. Oldish but still largely relevant to the broadcast strategies of the AFL and NRL
Evaluating Broadcast Strategy within Australian Football
The central aim this paper is to evaluate the broadcast strategies of Australia's two leading commercial sports, the Australian Football League (AFL) and the Na
papers.ssrn.com
Last edited:
Wow the AFL was miles ahead in 2014 but I wonder if it is still the same now?Paper by Hunter Fujak from last decade worth the read to those interested (which is most who hang out on this sub forum), not just for my own point score. Oldish but still largely relevant to the broadcast strategies of the AFL and NRL
Evaluating Broadcast Strategy within Australian Football
The central aim this paper is to evaluate the broadcast strategies of Australia's two leading commercial sports, the Australian Football League (AFL) and the Napapers.ssrn.com
View attachment 1255407
View attachment 1255402
I suspect it would be similar now to then
The key with Hunter Fujak's table is he converted it in to time units so a fair comparison can be made. If you were aggregating average hours then the AFL would have marginally "lost" overall over the period (3.3%) and marginally "won" if you just considered premiership ratings themselves....
Dirty Bird
Pokémon Master
See, I agree 5:30 is a good time. But not everyone gets that, only those in 3 states and 1 territory.
530 AEDT
5 ACDT
430 AEST
4 ACST
230 AWT
Sure, 62% of Australia gets the 530 game.
But 38% still suffer from the negatives of the afternoon game.
How about we push for 630 AEST?
Just that little bit later, but that little bit later allows another 28% of viewers to get home after shops shut
Sure, West Australian's will be screwed either way (The only way to make it work well for them is to **** over the East Coast) but 630 is beneficial to 90% of the country, where-as 530 is only beneficial to 62%
Macca180
All Australian
Imagine if it was on prime time.... night
nothing would come close
nothing would come close
Mr Taswegian
Roo Man
- May 25, 2019
- 2,632
- 1,188
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
I have noticed ticketec are selling tickets to the hill at Blundstone,do people know if they are filling this to this season's games?
PonsfordMagpie
Brownlow Medallist
- Oct 3, 2013
- 10,795
- 22,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
- Other Teams
- Chelsea
Boxing Day test crowd:
57,100
57,100
BobbyMorri
Community Leader
- Moderator
- #2,050
depends on health regulations.
So, who knows. The hill would be 20% capacity atm, judging by the crowd numbers.
- Status
Similar threads
